Anjum Sehgal And ORS v. State Through Sho Ps Crime Women Cell Nanak Pura And ANR

$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3256/2024 ANJUM SEHGAL AND ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Ajit Nair & Mr. Akash Deep, Advocates alongwith P-1 and P-3 in person.

P-2 and P-4 through Vc.

versus STATE THROUGH SHO PS CRIME WOMEN CELL NANAK PURA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with Insp. Rita, P.S. CWC Nanakpura.

Mr. Prabhjit Jauhar & Ms. Gauri Rajput, Advocates for R-2 alongwith R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 28.05.2024 1.

The present petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No. 107/2016, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Crime (Women) Cell Nanakpura, New Delhi, and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Abhilasha Singh, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi. 2.

The marriage between the petitioner no.1/husband and the respondent no.2/wife was solemnized on 09.12.2004 as per Hindu Rites and Customs The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

and one male child and one female child were born out of the said wedlock. 3.

Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2, the parties started residing separately from 19.11.2015. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged a complaint against petitioner no. 1 (husband), petitioner no. 2 (father-in-law), petitioner no. 3 (mother-in-law) and petitioner no. 4 (brother-in-law). 4.

On 05.0.2024, parties arrived at a settlement, which is recorded in the order dated 05.04.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CONT.CAS(C) 879/2020 (Annexure P-3). As per the said order, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay a total amount of Rs. 1 Crore, out of which an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the respondent no.2, has already been paid on the same date. Further, petitioner no.1 had agreed to pay Rs. 95 lakhs by way of Bank drafts in favour of their minor children. 5.

Petitioners 1, 3, and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and petitioners no. 2 and 4 appear through video conferencing and have been duly identified by their respective counsel, as well as the Investigating Officer, Insp. Rita, P.S. CWC Nanakpura. 6.

In terms of the settlement, demand drafts in favour of the minor children have been handed over to the Complainant/respondent no.2, who acknowledges the receipt of the same. The details of the said demand drafts are as under:

(i) Details of demands drafts in favour of Riya Sehgal: S.no.

DD No.

Date Amount in Rs.

Drawn on 520674 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

516476 22.04.2024 2,75,000/- 516459 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516460 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516461 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516462 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516463 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516465 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516464 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 520677 520676 520678 3,75,000/- 520675 Total amount 47,50,000/- (ii) Details of demands drafts in favour of Ryan Sehgal: S.no.

DD No.

Date Amount in Rs.

Drawn on 520683 3,75,000/- 516475 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516457 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516474 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516472 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516473 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

520682 520681 520680 520679 516458 22.04.2024 2,75,000/- 516455 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- 516456 22.04.2024 3,00,000/- Total amount 47,50,000/- 7.

The Complainant/respondent no.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioners and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed against the petitioners. She further states that all the terms of the settlement have been complied with.

8.

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed. 9.

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon‟ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:- "61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings."

10.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 107/2016, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Crime (Women) Cell Nanakpura, New Delhi, and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Abhilasha Singh, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi.

11.

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 107/2016, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Crime (Women) Cell Nanakpura, New Delhi, and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Abhilasha Singh, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi, is hereby quashed.

12.

It is however directed that this order shall not come in the way of the minor children in claiming their rights of inheritance, maintenance, educational & marriage expenses, etc. against any of the parties. 13.

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 14.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 28, 2024/bsr Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.